CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 11712, 23 July 1901, Page 3

CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.

'A STRONG PROTEST AGAINST MEDDLESOME LEGISLATION.' -' A meeting of the Council 'of; the Auckland Chamber of Commerce was held at the Victoria Arcade yesterday afternoon, Mr. D. R. Caldwell (president) in the chair. There were also-present: Messrs. M. A. Clark, W. Gunson, B. J. Kemp, Hugh Campbell," W. J. W. Philson, J. M. Mennie, Graves Aickin, F. G. Ewington, Roberton. Site of Hall of Commerce: Mr. Kemp reported that a deputation from the Chamber had waited upon the Finance Committee of the Auckland Harbour Board in connection with the site for a Chamber of Commerce, and said that the two sections , originally fixed upon had since been disposed i of by the Board. The Board, however, had i suggested other sections, and he thought i from the tone of the members that the sec- ■ tions could be obtained if the Chamber ap- I proached them on the matter. The two see- , tions were in Custom-street East, adjoining j Messrs. P. Hayman and Co.'s premises. Mr. j Aickin said that while the Council had not [ been in a position to complete negotiations for the original sections, owing to a want . of-funds, he still thought that the Chamber j had a moral right to them, despite the fact j that the time for purchase as provided in the agreement had expired. After further discussion, it was decided that the Chamber should address a letter to the Harbour Board, with a view to obtaining the necessary allotments. . ' Auctioneers Bill: Tho report of the Finance Committee, submitted by • Mr. Kent, stated that clause 2 of this Bill, providing j that an auctioneer shall distinctly name the j vendor, and also the last bidder at a sale, was most mischievous, and- one that it was ; impossible to comply with, as no good could possibly come of it. The success or nonsuccess of any trader depended mainly on his knowledge of who were sellers and who were buyers, and it was clearly wrong thai he should be compelled to reveal the knowledge to a room full of people. It was a direct encouragement to dishonest dealing,, and would lead to a lot' of low-class men hanging about auction rooms, who, having possessed themselves of the names of a seller and probable buyer, would go behind the auctioneer and try to deprive him of his commission. It would be .impossible for an auctione6r to comply with it, because in many instances he would not know the name of the last bidder, and could not compel | them to reveal it should they r refuse to do j so. Auction sales, to be successful, wouldhavo to be pushed through rapidly, and .the.; noting of names of last bidders • (non-pur-chasers) would occupy so much time as to ruin a sale, and in every ease prove a great hindrance to business." If the clause was to stand, some power would have to be given to auctioneers to compel bidders to reveal their names, with the result that but few people would attend sales, and business would be greatly injured, if not destroyed. Section 3, providing that the vendor is not to bid nor to employ an agent to do so, should also bo struck out. English law and colonial law had hitherto allowed a vendor either by himself or his agent, to bid up to his ' reserve price, and there was no just reason why he should be limited to one bid, or be compelled to say that it was his bid. No respectable auctioneer would allow a vendor to make a bid after his reserve had been reached, and in the opinion of the committee the Bill was absolutely unnecessary, and one that it was believed would, in- I stead of preventing abuses, develop far j greater abuses than those at present exist- | ing, and lead to much dishonesty. The re- ; port was adopted as read, and the secretary j was instructed to forward copies to the three j Auckland city members of the House, and to ; write asking the co-operation of Southern Chambers of Commerce in protesting against j the measure. ' Shops and Offices Bill: Mr. Kent submitted the report of the Finance Committee on the "Shops, and Offices Bill. - This stated that the Bill was a very important one and contained many clauses gravely detrimental to the very classes it was intended to benefit, whilst in some cases -employers of labour would be seriously and permanently injured if tho Bill became law. With regard to the hours of employment, clause C stated that no . assistant should work more ; than ,four hours continuously without an interval of at least one hour. The inclusion of such a clause would mean, that business premises remaining open between the hours of eight a.m. and six p.m. would have to close between twelve noon and two p.m., in order to prevent a breach of the provision that ■no assistants . should be allowed to, work more than four hours • continuously. Clause D stipulated that no work must bo done in or about a shop or its business between the hours of six p.m. and eight a.m. the following day. In the case of chemists employing assistants this would be extremely detrimental to the public interests, because no matter ' what public calamity might occur needing the immediate services of medical men or medicines, the Bill said that after six p.m. and until eight a.m. there "should be no relief possible, thus so regulating the hours when accidents and serious illness might take place. Clause 2 stated that the shop assistant should be deemed to-be employed in the shop if ho did any work in or about the shop, whether the occupier had assented thereto or not. This would be rank folly. In the case of ;an assistant who for his own comfort and convenience ohoso to work an extra hour or ~ two to ; clear, away arrears in his department, and did so without the, knowledge of employer, no greater injustice could be done to all such employers— themselves innocent— to heavily punish them at law. Holidays were also definitely fixed at low by the Bill and could onlv have the effect of making employers decline all others, thus seriously curtailing the holidays and privileges enjoyed by assistants at present. Further than this, there would not be a single chemist's shop open in New Zealand, after one o'clock every Saturday throughout the year excepting between the hours of seven and nine p.m. This would be a grave menace to the general weal of the public. Clerks in offices of all descriptions, including bank clerks, would" be, seriously affected in a similar way, and generally the Bill was one that should not have been drawn at all, and in its present shape was unworkable, unnecessary and calculated to do very serious injury to all trades, industries and professions The • Chairman having pointed out that the employers themselves did not want the Bill, the renort was then ' adopted, and as in the case of the previous report,, the secretary was instructed to forward copies to the city members of the House and to invite the co-operation of Southern Chambers

in opposing it-. * Eight Hours Bill: Mr. Kent next read the report of the Finance Committee on the Eight Hours Bill. This (the committee stated) was a Bill more particularly intended to apply to farm labourers, male and female, and domestic servants. Clause 2 of the Bill stipulated, amongst other k unreasonable things, that 48 hours per week should be a week's work on or about a farm, or eight" hours per clay. Any man possessing even a slight knowledge of. agriculture .knew full well that ; such clauses would be ruinous to the farming industry, and therefore could not be given effect to by either male or female employees. Generally the,Bill was quite uncalled for and ou<*ht never to have been drawn at all. To force such a Bill upon the country would be to paralyse agricultural interests, which were already sufficiently handicapped without having additional burden placed upon them by such meddling and mischievous legislation. Mr. Kent said the Bill ■; was the most idiotic thing ever known, and Mr. Philson drew attention to the fact that while the moasure was called an • Eight Hours Bill, it would only allow of 45 hours' work weekly. The report was adopted, copies to be sent to the city members of the House and Southern Chambers to be invited to oppose its bocominglaw.